A poll conducted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that barely half of Scots were in favour of making the cards compulsory, compared with 72 per cent for Britain as a whole.Maybe people in England are more concerned about terrorism.
I'm not at all comfortable with this part of the survey:
It found that almost two-thirds of voters would support some state funding of political parties to reduce their dependence on donations from wealthy individuals.Why on earth should we be forced to pay for political parties? Many people won't approve of any party and might prefer to vote for independents. There are good intellectual arguments in favour of anarchism.
I understand why some members of the public want to "limit the danger of individuals seeking to buy influence". I share that concern. However, the way to reduce undue influence is not to restrict free speech but to limit the powers of the state to protecting us from those who initiate force or fraud. In such a society there is no political benefit in being rich or poor and therefore no reason to seek to influence politicians for personal gain.